THE MOSQUE NEAR HALLOWED GROUND

By H. N. Burdett

For conclusive proof that the politics of hate remains alive and sick in this nation that was established on the principle of religious freedom, one need not look beyond the ongoing controversy over the planned Lower Manhattan site of the 13-story Cordoba House community center which includes a mosque. The proposed facility has drawn national attention because it is located within the vicinity of the hallowed ground on which the World Trade Center graced the New York skyline prior to the 9/11 terrorist attack.

With midterm national elections in the offing, the brouhaha is red meat for certain politicians ever eager to exploit issues that move voters to react rather than challenge them to think.

Prospective candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination are at the forefront of the flock of right-wing vultures swooping down for a nibble of the perceived carrion of liberal appeasement. And they know only too well what jerks the knees of their constituents.

Writing on Twitter, the GOP's prototypical go-for-the-jugular headline grabber, Sarah Palin, asserted that the "Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation: it stabs hearts." The former Governor of Alaska and erstwhile Republican nominee for Vice President added: "9/11 mosque=act of fitna [Arabic for scandal] 'equivalent to building Serbian Orthodox church @ Srebrenica killing fields where Muslims were slaughtered.' "

Newt Gingrich, the former Georgia congressman now a college professor rummaging through issues to ignite his sputtering hopes of becoming the next Republican occupant of the White House, seizes the mosque uproar as just such an opportunity.

"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York, so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia," says Professor Gingrich, with all of the logic of adopting one's enemy's modus operandi and in so doing becoming the mirror image of what he is supposed to be combatting; to say nothing of forgetting that the Saudis are self-styled moderates who have pledged themselves to fighting terrorism.

"The time for double standards that allow Islamists to behave aggressively toward us while they demand weakness and submission is over," Gingrich prattles on. "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington."

When the skewed reasoning of the blatantly and proudly visceral Palin and the pseudo-cerebral Gingrich implodes, it may finally dawn upon someone of influence in their ranks that the United States has declared war on terrorism, not Islam.

The self-same mentality that blocked the George W. Bush administration from distinguishing between the Salafist jihadists of Al Qaeda and the secular Baathists of Iraq under Saddam Hussein has apparently afflicted his would-be successors.

So clueless are the perpetrators of the myth that Islam is monolithic -- akin to judging all of Christianity by Roman Catholicism, or Judaism by Hasidim -- that Rick Lazio, a GOP candidate for governor of New York, has suggested that the individual behind the mosque project might be connected to "radical organizations."

In fact, that individual, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, is seen by Osama bin Laden as an enemy, an appeaser of infidels. As the author William Dalrymple wrote recently in The New York Times, the Taliban "no doubt regards him as a legitimate target for assassination."

Feisal Abdul Rauf is among America's leading proponents of Sufism, the mystical form of Islam that is an indigenous, deep-rooted resistance movement against violent Islamic radicalism. Sufis' open, intellectual interpretation of the Quran is seen by the Rand Corporation as an intriguing element that makes them ideal "partners in the effort to combat Islamic extremism." To suggest that the imam is radical is like comparing Mother Theresa with Torquemada.

The Taliban and Al Qaeda no more represent all of Islam than the Southern Baptist Convention or the Missouri Synod represent all of Christianity. While any number of Islamic moderates have been radicalized by the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Sufis are not among them.

Several journalists have pointed out that the proposed mosque is not within the fenced-off area of downtown Manhattan known as Ground Zero. The mosque site is two blocks north of the former World Trade Center. Palin, Gingrich and their ilk are either unaware of this or have chosen to tip-toe around the inconvenient fact that there is indeed an existing mosque merely a few hundred feet further from the actual Ground Zero location.

Nor are Palin and Gingrich the only GOP presidential candidates to voice their opposition to the planned Cordoba House cultural center.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee questions whether advocates of the project feel "we can offend Americans and Christians, but not foreigners and Muslims." Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty worries that the mosque would "degrade or disrespect" the Ground Zero site. Mitch Romney, the once moderate Republican governor of Massachusetts whose born again conservativism coincided with his entry into presidential politics, weighs in by expressing concern for "the wishes of the families of the deceased and the potential for extremists to use the mosque for global recruiting and propaganda."

Romney's concerns are dumbfounding when it is generally acknowledged that the strongest boost to extremist recruitment and propaganda is the continuing U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Had the aforementioned candidates taken the time and trouble to learn what is actually behind plans to build Cordoba House, the so-called Ground Zero mosque, they would have found that, in addition to a place of worship, it will function as a full-service community and cultural center. A performing arts center and a bookstore, as well as a swimming pool, basketball court and fitness center will share space with the mosque within the facility.

While a number of Republican candidates have shamefully bowed homage to the politics of hate in the Cordoba House matter, this has hardly been the finest hour for some Democrats out to save their political hides by seeking to out-demagogue their opponents on the controversy.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid, D-Nevada, demonstrated the very antithesis of leadership and an appalling absence of political courage when he announced his position, but not personally, on the mosque controversy. He delegated a spokesman to do the honors, which were conveyed via e-mail: "The First Amendment protects freedom of religion. Senator Reid respects that, but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else." At least the anxiety-ridden Reid, in the battle of his political life with Tea Party-endorsed Sharron Angle, mentions his respect for the First Amendment -- something none of the GOP politicians could manage.

Louisiana Rep. Charles Maloncon, who is seeking to unseat Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, said, "I support freedom of religion, but let's give the families of 9/11 victims a voice about where this mosque will be placed, because putting one near Ground Zero isn't appropriate.

Wealthy real estate investor Jeff Greene, running against Rep. Kendrick B. Meek for the Democratic Senate nomination in Florida's August 24 primary, contends, "Common sense and respect for those who lost their lives and loved ones gives sensible reasons to build the mosque somewhere else."

Even more shocking than Senator Reid's queasy approach to opposing the Cordoba House mosque is President Obama's day-after dilution of his eloquent defense of freedom of religion.

Speaking recently at a traditional White House dinner first held by Thomas Jefferson to celebrate Ramadan, the Islamic holy month, Obama said, "As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local law and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable."

The following day, speaking to the press rather than to Muslims gathered in the White House, the President equivocated. "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there," he said. Apparently his call for Change included his right to change his mind. He did not say whether his no-comment pledge was as a citizen or as president. I, for one, would like to know.

Baltimore Sun columnist Jean Marbella, who covered 9/ll and its aftermath for the same newspaper, revisited the site recently. She noted that the Ground Zero boundaries are "pretty clear": the site itself remains fenced off, and the Cordoba House site is a full two blocks away.

"If you took everything within several blocks of the former trade center site and considered it a part of Ground Zero," Marbella writes, "you'd have Ground Zero nail salons, Ground Zero fake designer sunglass stores, Ground Zero places that want to rub your feet and. . .the legendary Ground Zero Century 21 discount department store. None of which disrespects the real Ground Zero."

Back in May, arguing for permission to build the Islamic community and cultural center, Daisy Khan, executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, said, "It will have a real community feel, to celebrate the pluralism in the United States, as well as in the Islamic religion. It will also serve as a major platform for amplifying the silent voice of the majority of Muslims who have nothing to do with extremist ideologies. It will counter the extremist momentum."

Ms. Khan said, "We are Americans, too. The 9/11 tragedy hurt everybody, including the Muslim community. We are all in this together, and together we have to fight against extremism and terrorism."

I respectfully suggest that when the Cordoba House is built and open to the public that it include a conspicuous memorial, including perhaps the names of some 300 American Muslims who were among the victims of the heinous September 11 attacks.